• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W: 594] A great question for pro abortion types

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

straykatz said:
You do know that birth control is not 100% fail proof? Women have gotten pregnant while on the pill, using IUD's, condoms, etc. Heck, some women even got pregnant after having their tubes tied and what about cases where pregnancy occurs after vasectomies.
Click to expand...

That's why they teach us in school that only abstinence is 100%. If you aren't adult enough to care for a child then you aren't adult enough to have sex.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

AlphaOmega said:
That's why they teach us in school that only abstinence is 100%.
Click to expand...
That only works for those who can not get any.

If you aren't adult enough to care for a child then you aren't adult enough to have sex.
Click to expand...
Who the **** are you to judge?
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
You know I don't want to cross swords with you, but I have to ask, when do the rights of the father(partner) surface, assuming the father wants the child? Remember the description sexual Union?
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

Fathers rights surface around the time of birth, most of them after birth. You know when there is an actual child/baby. Before that it is her body, her choice.
 
Last edited:
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Lursa, you are very well studied on the issue and I doubt I can mount a contrary mathematical argument. I fear you may not understand that those who oppose abortion on demand have a, dare I say, spiritual objection. It isn't a formula that can be displayed. It feels as a deep need to protect the most innocent of us. I have agreed with you before about the exceptions, like incest, rape, mothers survivability. The very early termination of pregnancy are, in my own personal view, a sad but understandable exception as well.
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

Spiritual objections? Your spiritual objections are best left for yourself. If you object to abortion, don't have one. If you object to alcohol, don't drink it.

The NEED to control people via religious legislative fiat is an odious abuse of power that must be rejected at every level of our society.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

AlphaOmega said:
That's why they teach us in school that only abstinence is 100%. If you aren't adult enough to care for a child then you aren't adult enough to have sex.
Click to expand...

Not very realistic. Sex is an enormously joyful part of life. TO expect abstinence only for procreation is just not an obtainable goal.

Abstinence only education has been a dismal failure.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

wolfsgirl said:
Even the best possible birth control has a failure rate.
Click to expand...

and that doesn't not support aborting to solve the new "problem".
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

straykatz said:
You do know that birth control is not 100% fail proof? Women have gotten pregnant while on the pill, using IUD's, condoms, etc. Heck, some women even got pregnant after having their tubes tied and what about cases where pregnancy occurs after vasectomies.
Click to expand...

And I'll say it again:NONE of those "mishaps" is grounds for murder (which you abortionists call "abortion".
 
A correction

smallvoice said:
And I'll say it again:NONE of those "mishaps" is grounds for murder (which you abortionists call "abortion".
Click to expand...

No, abortion is what the US Supreme Court called it in 1973, in Roe v. Wade. & BTW, they also held in Roe that an abortion under the guidelines of Roe is not murder. So that's where that comes from, just so you know.
 
Re: A correction

southwest88 said:
No, abortion is what the US Supreme Court called it in 1973, in Roe v. Wade. & BTW, they also held in Roe that an abortion under the guidelines of Roe is not murder. So that's where that comes from, just so you know.
Click to expand...

Great, I suspect you are terrified that that miscarriage of "justice" will be rectified. Those of us who recognize murder when we see it, prefer to use the actual terminology.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

straykatz said:
You do know that birth control is not 100% fail proof? Women have gotten pregnant while on the pill, using IUD's, condoms, etc. Heck, some women even got pregnant after having their tubes tied and what about cases where pregnancy occurs after vasectomies.
Click to expand...

Actually, I do. But that does not negate that the killing of a defenseless human being as a birth control method, no matter how effective (100%), is still murder.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

AlphaOmega said:
That's why they teach us in school that only abstinence is 100%. If you aren't adult enough to care for a child then you aren't adult enough to have sex.
Click to expand...

And "just say no" worked too.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

smallvoice said:
and that doesn't not support aborting to solve the new "problem".
Click to expand...

It does if the woman who gets pregnant doesn't want to be pregnant.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

smallvoice said:
Actually, I do. But that does not negate that the killing of a defenseless human being as a birth control method, no matter how effective (100%), is still murder.
Click to expand...

Why are you lying? A zef is not a human being and abortion is not murder. That's been proven many times here, so anyone who continues to say it is is lying.
 
But feel free

smallvoice said:
Great, I suspect you are terrified that that miscarriage of "justice" will be rectified. Those of us who recognize murder when we see it, prefer to use the actual terminology.
Click to expand...

No, there's a long list of precedents & cases & reasoning from UK common law & US common law, SC rulings on privacy & family law & reproduction issues - birth control, contraceptives, information on contraceptives, contraceptive devices, family planning & on & on - that are immediate predecessors to Roe v. Wade. & Roe's been in place since 1973, & a lot of law since has included Roe as part of its inheritance. It's getting late in the day to try to revoke Roe without also impacting a lot of family & privacy (medical) law since Roe.

As for abortion being murder - well, you can try charging someone - a woman who underwent an abortion, the attending doctors, nurses, assistants, the clinic or hospital or private practice that was the scene of the crime. & then slug it out in court (it would actually be the state bringing the case, of course. & given that Roe still prevails, I doubt that you could get a District Attorney to even attempt a prosecution. But that might be instructive, nonetheless.)
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

smallvoice said:
and that doesn't not support aborting to solve the new "problem".
Click to expand...

Sure it does. You can consent to sex and not to pregnancy. I see no one advocating for people to be forced to donate organs post mortem, so I see no reason why that privacy over ones body should not be protected through all stages of life.

The pro birth argument is sorely lacking in consistency.
 
Re: A correction

smallvoice said:
Great, I suspect you are terrified that that miscarriage of "justice" will be rectified. Those of us who recognize murder when we see it, prefer to use the actual terminology.
Click to expand...

Meat is murder.

It's great to make up our own definitions
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

smallvoice said:
And I'll say it again:NONE of those "mishaps" is grounds for murder (which you abortionists call "abortion".
Click to expand...

If one was never born how can one be murdered?

IMO...Life needs to be sustainable outside the womb...in most cases...abortions take place long before life outside the womb is sustainable. No woman should be forced to be an incubator for an embryo/fetus/unborn unless she choses to be. and....IMO....no one should force their belief whether it is right or wrong onto another against their will.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Peter King said:
Fathers rights surface around the time of birth, most of them after birth. You know when there is an actual child/baby. Before that it is her body, her choice.
Click to expand...

C'mon Pete. I don't believe there is a question as to what ends a woman ought go to protect her health, anymore than for males. The real question is not what she does with her body, rather then, the body of the unfortunate infant that was planted in her womb.
Regards,
CP
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
C'mon Pete. I don't believe there is a question as to what ends a woman ought go to protect her health, anymore than for males. The real question is not what she does with her body, rather then, the body of the unfortunate infant that was planted in her womb.
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

Well it is up to every woman herself what she decides to do with the ZEF growing inside of her. And there is no infant growing in a woman as an infant is a born child from birth to one year old (some think it is two years). And unfortunate? How can one be unfortunate if there is no consciousness/brain to realize "life" at all?

Also? How is this related to father's rights? You know, the thing you were posting about and I was responding too?
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Logical1 said:
The question is-----------if the baby aborted is not human, why are organs being harvested from them. That doesnt seem to compute.

Any logical comments?
Click to expand...

That's not a great question. Its not even a mediocre question.

False thread title is false.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
C'mon Pete. I don't believe there is a question as to what ends a woman ought go to protect her health, anymore than for males. The real question is not what she does with her body, rather then, the body of the unfortunate infant that was planted in her womb.
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

There are no infants in UTERUSES.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Obscurity said:
Spiritual objections? Your spiritual objections are best left for yourself. If you object to abortion, don't have one. If you object to alcohol, don't drink it.

The NEED to control people via religious legislative fiat is an odious abuse of power that must be rejected at every level of our society.
Click to expand...

Do you somehow see yourself as exempt from any spiritual(call it moral stops if you like that better) feeling at all? There have been those who would lie and steal from the religious. That is wrong, no question. But to state that religious fiat is to blame for anything you and I would consider frivolous law, is a far leap. Understanding that the Ten Commandments are the tenements the religious among us choose to live by: Please state which Commandment you consider odious abuse and anti-humanitarian. I am certainly interested in what I and others may have missed, and where you can straighten us out. By the way, had you considered becoming a member of the Atheist paratroopers? You could land in Iran and quickly fix the whole religious mess. Oh, no interest? Then continue attacking the Christian religion from the safety your basement.
I defy you to make an anti-Islamist statement! You won't, because religion won't hunt you down and cutoff your head. Some Muslims will. Leave Christians alone and in Peace.
Regards,
CP
 
Last edited:
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Do you somehow see yourself as exempt from any spiritual(call it moral stops if you like that better) feeling at all? There have been those who would lie and steal from the religious. That is wrong, no question. But to state that religious fiat is to blame for anything you and I would consider frivolous law, is a far leap. Understanding that the Ten Commandments are the tenements the religious among us choose to live by: Please state which Commandment you consider odious abuse and anti-humanitarian. I am certainly interested in what I and others may have missed, and where you can straighten us out. By the way, had you considered becoming a member of the Atheist paratroopers? You could land in Iran and quickly fix the whole religious mess. Oh, no interest? Then continue attacking the Christian religion from the safety your basement.
I defy you to make an anti-Islamist statement! You won't, because religion won't hunt you down and cutoff your head. Some Muslims will. Leave Christians alone and in Peace.
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

If you mean religious feelings with spiritual than yes, I am even more than exempt I am devoid of spiritual feelings. And what does morality have to do with spirituality?

And I disagree with all religions? Is that anti-islamic? Why would I want to make a specific statement regarding that? I don't believe allah, jahweh or god exists, just like I don't believe Moses, Jesus, Mohammed and any other prophet from the biblical times exists. Is that anti-islamic enough? And anti-christian and anti-jewish?

And being an atheist is a personal view on the truth, most atheists only fight for their right to think that way. We are not the religious zealots who think they have to attack another religion so that they can expose them to the only true god and prophet.

Also, what again does this really have to do with abortion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom